Tricks of the Trade: How the White House and Legacy Media Concoct Pro-Democrat Narratives

Donald Trump recently announced his intention to sue CBS News for $10 billion, claiming that the network's editing of Kamala Harris's interview on 60 Minutes constituted "election interference."

In a parallel move, House Republicans are contemplating an investigation into how the White House edited President Joe Biden's controversial "garbage" comment. They argue this might violate the Presidential Records Act of 1978.

The GOP contends that both the White House and the media are engaged in efforts to portray Biden and Harris more favorably as Election Day approaches. This appears to be part of a larger trend of collaboration between the press and White House staff that has been ongoing for some time.

In mid-August, The National Interest lambasted the US mainstream media for what it referred to as Kamala Harris's "rebranding." The publication pointed out that Harris received "glamorous cover profiles" and positive coverage, despite her historically low approval ratings as vice president and her inability to address the border crisis after being appointed by Biden as "border czar."

In mid-October, Fox News anchor Bret Baier confronted Harris with a series of challenging questions regarding migration, her economic agenda, and her vice-presidential record. This line of questioning led Harris's aides to cut the interview short after less than 30 minutes.

Earlier, the White House repeatedly downplayed and sugar-coated Joe Biden's "gaffes", including the one concerning US "military defense" of Taiwan.

In July, Civic Media, a radio station in Milwaukee, acknowledged that it had made two edits to a July 3 recording of an interview with Biden that aired later, following a request from his campaign. This interview came on the heels of Biden's poor performance in his June 27 debate against Trump.

The first edit concerned Biden's claim that his administration included more Black officials than "all other presidents combined."

The second edit removed his comments about Trump’s call for the death penalty for the Central Park Five teens, who were later exonerated. "I don't know if they even called for their hanging or not, but he–but they said […] convicted of murder," Biden asserted.

In early July, Andrea Lawful-Sanders, a host on Philadelphia's WURD radio, conducted a separate interview with Biden and later admitted that she had asked four out of the eight questions that had been drafted for her by Biden’s aides. Michael LaRosa, a former press secretary for First Lady Jill Biden, commented to Axios that the practice of "pre-submitting questions" for interviewees has long been a strategy of the Biden team.

In February 2024, the White House pressured Fox News to revise its coverage of corruption allegations against President Biden, arguing that the claims were based on misleading data provided by FBI informant Alexander Smirnov, who allegedly fabricated the accusations against the president. Fox News declined the request, citing broader corruption allegations put forth by House investigators concerning the Biden family.

https://sputnikglobe.com/20241101/tricks-of-the-trade-how-the-white-house-and-legacy-media-concoct-pro-democrat-narratives-1120748951.html

NOT A SINGLE ISSUE HAS BEEN ADDRESSED BY KAMALA OR DONALD...

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

“It’s hard to do cartoons without issues…”

         Gus Leonisky

Fyodor Lukyanov: Will Americans go for ‘globalist’ Harris or ‘patriot’ Trump?

The race for the White House has been short on ideas but big on insults. Neither candidate looks very inspiring

The race for the US White House has been nervy and protracted, with the late forced withdrawal of President Joe Biden – seen even by his supporters as having little chance of winning – adding a twist during the summer. And episodes of political violence have been poisoning the atmosphere.

The political content has been poor – images and clichés instead of ideas. Towards the end, everything is reduced to crude personal attacks. Most observers and even participants realise that both candidates are, to put it mildly, suboptimal.

Kamala Harris was unexpectedly handed a lottery ticket that she has struggled to capitalize on. As vice-president, she has made little impact. Thus, at the heart of her truncated campaign was an attempt to convince voters that she had untapped potential. It didn’t quite work. It was conspicuous that the challenger has acted according to instructions, and that spontaneous reactions other than infectious laughter are thin on the ground. Her willingness to diametrically change views on key issues has failed to lend any ballast to the campaign, although the tactical calculations are clear.

Donald Trump has lost the flair of sensational novelty and does not exude the type of energy he did eight years ago. His narcissism, which used to be partly offset by a kind of lightness and enthusiasm, now often comes across as oppressive. And expectations that the former president would become more respectable with experience and take on the air of a wise statesman have not been fulfilled.

Whatever about the bona fides of the candidates, major political forces have rallied around them. Harris, who was not seriously considered in the spring, has united the most influential clans of Democrats. They joined the process less out of sympathy for her than out of fear of Trump. The latter, who once seemed like an eccentric freak whose antics made the Republican establishment cringe, now personifies his party and determines its direction. Despite the flaws of the rivals and their lack of coherent platforms, the choice Americans are making is clear.

The Democratic Party inherits a political tradition that received a powerful boost at the turn of the 1980s and 1990s. At that time, on a wave of the successful conclusion of the confrontation with the USSR, American self-esteem rose sharply. This allowed it to set itself far more ambitious goals, not only in terms of global influence, but also in terms of transforming the homeland. The disappearance of the Soviet adversary unleashed ambitions as well as resources. International dominance offered new opportunities, including for domestic development, but also imposed burdens that gradually began to contradict key internal interests. Nevertheless, the position of hyperpower is perceived as natural not only politically, but also morally and ethically. Especially since progressives, who form part of the democratic core, see themselves as agents of radical social change at home and abroad. “City upon a hill” is interpreted in an expansionist way.

The Republican Party has had a more complex journey over the same period. Seeing itself as the victor over world communism (hello, Ronald Reagan), thirty years later it denounces perceived Marxist domination of the US itself, thus reacting to the left-liberal turn of the Democrats. The Republicans also went through a phase of fascination with foreign expansion, for a time heavily influenced by the neoconservatives. But then the appeal of these policies to promote American interests faded. The more traditional approach of not carrying too much extra weight and taking care of your own came to the fore.

If we simplify the description, while sacrificing important details, we get a menu of ‘liberal-globalists’ versus ‘national-patriots.’ For all its populist primitiveness, it does reflect the choice facing Americans. It is certainly not a crossroads where turning one way or the other means irrevocably choosing a path. There will be no linear movement, because the country is vast, there are many conflicting factors, the society is complex and it doesn’t fall in line on command.

Although there is a caveat to the latter. The US is a very special country. Alexis de Tocqueville, describing American democracy nearly 200 years ago, noted its theatricality and susceptibility to targeted campaigns. The American style of public policy is an illustration of this. Constant marketing as a manifestation of the spirit of capitalism has become intertwined with the processes of social transformation embedded in the original revolutionary nature of the American experiment itself.

Now there are unprecedented opportunities for manipulation through modern means of communication. Thus, some vested interests, who are capable of mounting sophisticated influence efforts, can substantially influence the overall direction of the country’s development.

The globalist part of the establishment has had a significant influence since the end of the 20th century. What’s up in the air now is the ideological bent that will prevail after these elections.

This article was first published by the newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta and was translated and edited by the RT team

https://www.rt.com/news/606925-fyodor-lukyanov-americas-election/

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

“It’s hard to do cartoons without opposition…”

         Gus Leonisky

by steve_brown

“You don’t know how lucky you are boy.”

The lyric is of course from the opening song of the 1968 Beatles “white album”  with the song’s message misunderstood even today. That’s because the group poked ironic fun at both ideological systems — and not solely at the USA as alleged at the time.

Fifty-six (and counting) years later, the real irony of the song can be fully appreciated with at least one-half of the US political system* – namely the Democratic party – State-captured  in the Soviet style of old.  How is that Soviet-style? By anointing a criminal prosecutor as the Democrat’s presidential candidate, via the Democrats own version of the Night of the Long Knives, ousting a demented Neocon only to substitute him with a state prosecutor, who is perhaps somewhat more lucid (at times). Because beside being autocratically selected, the former state prosecutor — Kamala Harris — has not ever received one single public vote or delegate of her own, as a political candidate at the *national level*.

Harris simply assumed office by the coat tails of a Neocon courtesy the covf, and who has now propelled the world to the brink of World War 3. A feat as worthy as any the Soviet Politburo could ever engineer.  [Note though that the Politburo of the former Soviet Union would not ever install a political leader as incompetent and clearly unfit for duty as Kamala Harris. With the exception of Brezhnev of course, whose senility was either disregarded or hidden by the Soviets, just as the Democratic party has obfuscated Biden’s own senility.– ed.]

The history of this seemingly slow but indeed rapid US decline to a form of Soviet-style “democracy” arguably dates back to the state-sponsored murder of John F Kennedy on 22 November 1963, but truly had its Deep State evolution charted subsequent to the resignation of Richard M Nixonon August 9, 1974. However, it was Dwight D. Eisenhower who first warned about US State Capture as being perpetrated by the MIC, CIA, Dulles Brothers, etc, with his exit speech of January 17, 1961. While the maturation of the Deep State developed during the corrupt Clinton years, furthered by George W Bush, Dick Cheney, and Barak Obama.

Interestingly, Eisenhower could not have known about the powerful group of future Neocons that Henry ‘Scoop’ Jackson encouraged and nurtured,  the same venomous Neocon ideology which pollutes the Beltway region and its Warfare State to this very day. Eisenhower’s prescient ability to foretell that Neocon development may have been understandable though, via his exposure to the likes of Frank Wisner, Dulles Brothers, Dean Acheson, James Jesus Angleton, and many others of that ilk.

For a detailed observation from an insider with regard to the above, look no further than Rod Blagojevich and his Kafkaesque indictment, prosecution and imprisonment by the federal government — certainly politically motivated, and mired in the corruption that is extant in Washington.  A detailed discussion may be seen here in Blagojevich‘s interview with Tucker Carlson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDP6St8p7dk and while the interview is long, the Washington insider information learned – no matter how it’s spun – is priceless.

In Carlson’s interview, Rod Blagojevich still seems somewhat puzzled, or at least uncertain, about why the Deep State targeted him. Blagojevich explains his Serbian background, and that he was deeply opposed to Washington / NATO’s war criminal bombing of Serbia, and subsequent persecution of Serbian Christians inside Serbia, by US-backed Kosovar terrorists.

It seems that Mr Blagojevich is somewhat naive about Serbia’s relationship to Russia, and that the US (read: CIA) Deep State had ambitions to target Russia for destabilization via Albania since 1947.  Whether Mr  Blagojevich is unaware of the foregoing or was prevented from speaking about Serbia’s close ties to Russia in the interview, is unknown.

Now apparently the Wall Street ambition for a Soviet-style political machine dominant in the former United States — just as it engineered in Russia —  has been fully realized… well, almost. One man standing in the way of complete Soviet-style capture is Donald Trump. And the titans of Wall Street know that but must bet that they can subvert him anyway, should he win office.

At this stage of chaos in the US political system, we may only pray that he does win — however he may be flawed.   And must hope that such success will not further demonstrate the Elites capability to succeed at political mass insanity — just as they succeed at mass killing — as the privileged Billionaire Western Elites who have destroyed America so hope to continue.

“Back in the US.. US.. SR … ”

You don;t know how lucky you are, boy.

*In fact the US political system has been fully captured by ‘trillionaire’ Wall Street titans and the Fed/Wall Street’s highly criminalized banks, for many years.

Steve Brown

https://theduran.com/back-in-the-us-back-in-the-us-back-in-the-ussr/

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

“It’s hard to do cartoons without opposition…”

         Gus Leonisky

Liberals love to indulge in performative virtue signaling rather than serious political conviction. Recent events proved that their highest priority is maintaining alliances with the Democratic Party, while dismissing any inconvenient truths that point out their hypocrisy.

Nothing reveals the corrupt nature of U.S. politics like a presidential election. The theater of the absurd is played out every four years, giving the illusion of choice between two parties that more often act in agreement than not. Millions of people become emotionally invested in candidates who use red meat to generate support from their respective constituencies while defense contractors, big pharma executives, and oil company oligarchs sit back and watch, knowing that they will get what they want regardless of the outcome. Fake outrage is the order of the day, as the public is swayed by manufactured dramas meant to encourage participation, but often over insignificant issues.

This columnist personally witnessed the fervor of Donald Trump supporters as they entered New York City’s Madison Square Garden to attend a rally held on October 27. The MAGA hats and other paraphernalia that were worn and sold by street vendors are rarely seen in Manhattan and the arena which hosts sporting events and concerts instead had a large sign proclaiming, “DREAM BIG AGAIN!” with an image depicting a giant Trump who towered over the Empire State Building.

The rally was most definitely an opportunity for the MAGA crowd but failed because it reminded low motivation voters that they don’t like Trump very much and encouraged the normally apathetic to go to the polls. The proceedings probably did more harm than good as Trump and his supporters lived up to the worst expectations held about them. Some of the rally proceedings were comical, as Oprah Winfrey’s creation, Dr. Phil McGraw, proclaimed himself to be against DEI programs. The unqualified quack psychologist shouldn’t be seeing clients at all but became rich and famous because of patronage bestowed on him by a Black woman, but no matter. He knew his audience.

So did Rudy Giuliani. Giuliani has been disbarred in New York and in Washington, DC as a result of his 2020 shambolic courtroom performances in the futile effort to have Trump declared the winner. A judge ordered him to give the two Black women he defamed possession of his apartment in order to pay the judgment they won against him. Giuliani is financially embarrassed in large part because Trump has refused to pay the legal bills he incurred as a result of the quixotic election effort.

But Giuliani is sticking with his ungrateful client and continues to make a fool of himself on his behalf. He felt compelled to say that we must fear Palestinian toddlers . "The Palestinians are taught to kill us at two years old," shrieked the man once known as “America’s mayor.” For good measure, he added, "She (Kamala Harris) wants to bring them to you. They may have good people. I'm sorry I don't take a risk with people who are taught to kill Americans at two."

Of course, his comments were outrageous, but neither Giuliani nor Trump hold any office in the U.S. government now. Palestinian children are themselves killed by Israel with the help of the U.S. The fact of the U.S.'s role in their suffering is rarely mentioned by the liberals who upset themselves upon hearing Giuliani’s words. Many of these same people have proclaimed support for Kamala Harris, whose administration is killing Palestinian men, women, and children. More Palestinian women and children have been killed over the past year than during the same period of time in any conflict in the last 20 years. The dismal statistic is the result of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris' decision-making, yet many of those unnerved by Giuliani’s words stand by their candidate who is actually responsible for the ongoing genocide.

Not to be outdone by McGraw and Giuliani, a so-called comedian named Tony Hinchcliffe said, “I don’t know if you know this but there’s literally a floating island of garbage in the middle of the ocean right now. Yeah. I think it’s called Puerto Rico.”

The blatant racism is rightly condemned, but Puerto Rico, stolen from Spain in an imperialist war and kept as a “commonwealth”, is a U.S. colony and suffers due to its status. Tax giveaways to corporations plunged the island into debt , vulture hedge funds bought the debt and then sued Puerto Rico’s government when it couldn’t repay. Devastating austerity programs were presented as the only solution. Puerto Rico’s problems were created by republicans and democrats alike, and the independence that would solve its problems is stymied at every turn. Puerto Rico is rarely discussed but the musings of a racist comic put it back in the news with little discussion of what is right for the people there.

The Trump rally was not the only means of channeling well-intentioned but wasted energies. The Washington Post is a legacy newspaper that has always been a conduit of information for the state and often functioned as a cover for the CIA , hiring CIA agents as journalists or getting journalists to do its work. Even the Frank Church Senate Committee investigating the work of intelligence agencies hid the extent of CIA and media connections at the request of former agency directors such as George H.W. Bush. 

The paper is not as liberal as widely believed, but until this year reliably endorsed the Democratic Party presidential candidate. However, billionaire owner and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, decided not to endorse and the floodgates of liberal angst opened wide. The newspaper’s editorial team was apparently ready to endorse Harris but refrained on Bezos’ orders.

Bezos ownership was always problematic. The Post was the creator of the Propaganda Or Not hoax alleging Russian influence in outlets such as Black Agenda Report. Amazon has cloud computing contracts with the CIA, National Security Agency, and the Department of Defense. It is believed that Bezos feared losing his Blue Originsspace exploration contract with the federal government if Trump should win. Trump met with the Blue Origins CEO after the non-endorsement was announced.

Liberals reacted by canceling their subscriptions; more than 200,000 readers did so. They were not outraged by its long history of colluding with the state, of allowing journalists to spy, or even by the Bezos purchase. In 2019 Bernie Sanders was vilified when he questioned the Post’s biased coverage of his presidential campaign. But once the corporate media icon declined to give Harris the seal of approval, liberals declared war.

But it was Michelle Obama who delivered perhaps the week’s masterpiece of fakery and foolishness. She didn’t hold back as she spoke passionately in favor of abortion rights , but that was not the only issue she raised.

“To anyone out there thinking about sitting out this election or voting for Donald Trump or a third-party candidate in protest because you’re fed up, let me warn you, your rage does not exist in a vacuum.” It wasn’t enough for Michelle Obama to say she supports reproductive rights, she was also there to dissuade any independent thinkers from acting independently. But it isn’t a small party candidate that stands in the way of protecting abortion rights. It is democrats like her husband.

Barack Obama campaigned in 2008 claiming to be in support of codifying the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision into law by passing the Freedom of Choice Act . He was elected with control of both houses of congress, including a veto proof majority in the senate, but he took no action to pass the Act he claimed to care about. Ninety days into his term he declared that it was not his highest priority . It wasn’t even a low priority. Neither he nor any democratic member of congress attempted to get it passed.

Michelle Obama exhorted women to talk to the men in their lives about reproductive rights. Hopefully, she talked to her own husband about his betrayal of millions of people who wanted him to do what he said he would do. Now his wife pretends that the loss of abortion rights has nothing to do with him and everything to do with Donald Trump.

The Democratic Party is once again setting up its supporters for the okey doke. Even if Kamala Harris is elected with control of both houses will she fight for abortion rights, or will she say that her political capital must be spent elsewhere, or claim the parliamentarian won’t let her do what she wants? Will Puerto Rico be free or will it remain an exploited colony? As for Palestinian children, Harris has already answered that question. She says there will be no arms embargo against Israel and so Palestinians will continue to be killed.

Who knows what phony outrage awaits with less than one week before Election Day. There will surely be something but it is up to us not to be fooled again and to call out hypocrisy and lies when we hear them.

Margaret Kimberley is the author of Prejudential: Black America and the Presidents . You can support her work on Patreon and also find it on the Twitter , Bluesky , and Telegram platforms. She can be reached via email at margaret dot kimberley at blackagendareport dot com.

https://blackagendareport.com/trump-rally-washington-post-and-michelle-obama-generate-fake-outrage

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

“It’s hard to do cartoons without opposition…”

         Gus Leonisky

Polls show that the most important issue for women is killing their own children.

They don’t really even care about much else. Sure, they’ll support the Ukraine, gun control, high taxes, or whatever else if you tell them it’s a marker of high social status to support these things, but they really don’t care or even understand the issues. Abortion is the only issue that is personal to women, and women only care about things that are personal.

AP:

Thousands of women rallied Saturday in the nation’s capital and elsewhere in support of abortion rights and other feminist causes ahead of Tuesday’s election.

Demonstrators carried posters and signs through city streets, chanting slogans such as “We won’t go back.” Some men joined with them. Speakers urged people to vote in the election — not only for president but also on down-ballot issues such as abortion-rights amendments that are going before voters in various states.

At the Women’s March in Washington, feminist activist Fanny Gomez-Lugo read off a list of states with abortion ballot measures before leading the crowd in a chant of “Abortion is freedom!”

…

Some of Saturday’s rally participants also advocated for LGBTQ+ rights, higher wages, paid sick leave and greater efforts against gun violence.

See, they will add these other issues, because those are status symbols. Status is personal, the issues themselves are not. I’m sure women want more free money from the government and the companies that the government forces into hire women, but they aren’t going to go out make a big deal of that. They’re not going to march in the street. (Not even blacks will march in the street demanding more free money.)

The events were quite the fiasco.

The Heart of the Matter

Abortion is murder. That’s the easiest take and it’s also fully correct.

You might also note that women have become obsessed with Lilith, a Jewish female demon who has become a symbol of “liberation” and especially abortion.

It’s good to know the religious elements and to believe these things.

But there is a problem with reality getting divorced from religious doctrine. People sometimes cannot explain their religious views in normal language, and thus they end up looking silly in arguments. This is natural enough, for people who know what is right and don’t really need to explain why to anyone they care about, but because of this politics nonsense we have, “abortion is murder and these women are all satanic” is not really going to land in most political arguments.

Here is the basic reality: women have become totally adjusted to “freedom,” which means being able to spend their lives going around manipulating men using sexuality. Some of these men they simply fleece, but inevitably, they have sex with some of them. If they have a child, the ride is over. The fun ends.

We’ve all seen the single mother memes.

READ MORE:

https://www.unz.com/aanglin/masses-of-satanic-whores-march-through-the-streets-demanding-murder-of-own-children/

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

“It’s hard to do cartoons without being exposed…”

         Gus Leonisky

As US voters go to the polls on November 5th, they need to remind themselves that when the US elects its next domestic president, it is also selecting the emperor of a violent, global imperium. Choices made over sundry domestic issues have far reaching effects, far beyond local pocketbook or civil rights issues. They determine who lives and dies across the planet, and how much pain, harm and suffering the rest of the world will have to bear.

In this context, it’s fair to ask, who is the lesser evil? Trump or Harris?

The answer, of course, is “neither”. Like infinity, when it comes to evil, there’s not much use in finger-counting which is greater or lesser. They are cardinal equivalents. Third party is the moral choice.

However, between two terrible choices, President Kamala Harris–to the extent that she has institutional continuity with the Biden/CNAS administration and retains their key advisors–is likely to wage more wars: in Ukraine and most certainly with China.

This is not because Trump is less hawkish or more prudent, but because he is likely to be less effective. These have to do with:

Distraction, obstruction, and opprobrium:

Trump is likely to be focused on attacking/settling scores with domestic enemies, who have harassed, belittled, betrayed, tattled, audited, impeached, sued, indicted, prosecuted him, and possibly attempted his assassination. He is also more likely to be thwarted or obstructed by institutional forces as he implements his agenda, even if it is similar to Joe Biden’s, and more likely to attract opprobrium and opposition, including if he wages war.

Bean-counting vs Seoul force:

Trump has contempt for South Korea’s Yoon administration and wants to multiply the cost of stationing US troops in Korea nine-fold to $10 Billion/year. That could be a deal breaker. He openly refers to South Korea as a “money machine“. This mercantile transactionalism is likely to put sand into the gears of the US war machine that is preparing Korea as the easiest and first place to start an omnicidal war with China.

South Koreans are already furious with President Yoon Sok Yeol for subordinating South Korea’s political and economic interests to US foreign policy, and they are likely to impeach Yoon if he submits to such flagrant extortion. On the other hand, if he doesn’t pay up, and the US administration weakens its support of Yoon, the Korean people will rise up and overthrow him as they have other US-quisling presidents like Syngman Rhee, Chun Doo Hwan, Park Geun Hye. This will strategically diminish the prospects of the Empire. The canard of North Korean troops fighting in Ukraine is an attempt to stave off this bad end by heightening the stakes, promoting South Korea (and Yoon’s) status as a global “pivot state”, and enmeshing Korea into the Ukraine-NATO-Empire trainwreck.

Compassionate rape indulgences:

Trump was openly contemptuous of “Shinzo” (Abe), but he has even less relationship with Japanese Prime Minister Ishida (or any future potential Japanese PM). However, as with South Korea, his uncouth transactionalism around the omoiyari yosan (Japan’s “empathy contribution budget”) for US troops in Japan, is likely to disorient and vex the Japanese leadership, and outrage the populace who are already livid to be paying reverse indulgences for occupation and rape. JAKUS, the Japan-Korea-US alliance is already brittle, due to the current political weakness of Japan’s ruling LDP and South Korea’s hatred for Yoon’s pro-collaborationist position. Prime Minister Ishida has lost the lower house and the LDP, which has governed Japan as a virtual one-party state, is at its weakest in decades. Simultaneously, Yoon’s military collaboration with Japan, Korea’s former coloniser, is sending Yoon into crisis territory, as his approval rating plummets down to 17%.

Deadly insurance policy

Trump has said that the Taiwan authorities need to pay the US for protection because the US is “no different from an insurance company”. But Trump’s insurance company is a corporation that has no intention of paying out if Taiwan becomes the next Ukraine. He has also stated that Taiwan should spend 10% of its shrinking GDP on the military, a coded demand to buy more marked up US weapons systems. Again, the ruling DPP will be bewildered and rattled by Trump’s demand—an offer they can’t refuse: being asked to pony up for an extortionary “insurance” policy that guarantees almost certain denial of services while bankrupting the country: Trump has refused to state if he will commit troops to Taiwan to support US-prompted secessionism.

Currently Louise Hsiao, a former US citizen, serves as President’s William Lai’s Vice President. Hsiao, for her part, has bet all her chips on Ukraine–stating that “the Ukraine war sends a powerful message to China”. Trump’s potential Ukraine pullout could heighten the mortification.

Disdain for the McCain stain

Certainly, Trump is hawkish and belligerent on Iran and could greenlight war. He will also support Israel in continuing to wage its horrific genocide and ethnic cleansing, just as the Biden administration ministers to, indulges, and excuses every genocidal whim and action of Israel.

But Trump is likely to force some kind of settlement on Ukraine, because he hates losing and losers, and Ukraine is a losing war, which he can blame on Biden.

Trump’s language is extremely belligerent and hawkish, and he is rash and impulsive, but his narcissism traps him into trying to make himself look like a winner at all times. Like the over-validated child, who will avoid any challenge that might reveal the limits of his competence, Trump is less likely to test the outer limits of US power with peer competitors. That means he could be less likely to start conventional wars he cannot win, and be more likely to try to get out of losing wars. This could even be true for the genocidal war on Gaza, which despite its stream of atrocities, is Israel’s John McCain moment: a strategic and political loss for a coloniser that has been taken hostage by its own insanitys

Catastrophic reboot risk:

The catastrophic geopolitical risk with Trump is he may not understand the real risks of nuclear war—he has asked “Why have nukes if they can’t be used?”—and could be recklessly tempted or prompted to use them. This is in contradistinction to the CNAS neocons who will control Harris’ foreign policy and her nuclear threat posture: they understand the risks and costs, and they still seek to use them deliberately. They believe in integrating nuclear war seamlessly into conventional doctrine, exercises, signalling, and operations.

This is true also for climate change. Trump denies global warming and has stated that it is a Chinese conspiracy to undermine the US economy. The Harris-Biden administration understands global warming but sees sustainable transition as unacceptable because it would boost China’s development and global status. They see doubling down on burning fossil fuels as in US core strategic interests of maintaining hegemony. They would rather burn up the planet than let China shine.

In fact, they would rather destroy the planet than give up an ounce of privilege to the burgeoning multipolar world. Wonk-speaking necropolitical ideologues from their first cakewalk to the final funeral march of mankind, they would rather be dead rather than be led into a better world of sovereign independence, equality, non-interference, and peace.

If Trump is elected, the global south will pray that he never abandons his neo-mercantilist transactionalism and his petty narcissistic fraudulence. Until the dismantling of Empire and Capital, and until the West stops using wars to reboot the economy, this may be about the only thing that saves the world.

https://johnmenadue.com/who-should-be-the-next-emperor-of-the-violent-global-imperium/

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

“It’s hard to do cartoons without neo-leaders…”

         Gus Leonisky